Preferences for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) information among men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) at community outreach settings.

Community outreach efforts to increase HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) utilization by at risk men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) first need to elucidate preferences for learning about PrEP and linking to PrEP resources. In this pilot study, we observed that among MSM recruited through community outreach, HIV sexual risk-taking was significant, yet self-perceived PrEP knowledge was low and interest in learning more about PrEP was moderate. Most preferred learning about PrEP and being provided local PrEP clinic information through electronic media. However, receipt of PrEP information alone did not appear to motivate these men into presenting to a local clinic for PrEP evaluation.

Does a Video Improve Knowledge of HIV/AIDS and HIV Testing among a Global Internet Audience?

The objectives of this study were to determine if a video improved HIV/AIDS and HIV testing knowledge among a global sample of Internet users, to discern if this improvement was the same for English and Spanish speakers, and to ascertain if the video was efficacious for those with lower health literacy. A worldwide sample of English- or Spanish-speaking Internet users was solicited. Participants completed a 25-item questionnaire to assess their HIV/AIDS and HIV testing knowledge before and after watching the video. Mean scores on the questionnaire improved after watching the video for both English speakers (after: 19.6 versus before: 16.4; Δ = 3.2; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.8-3.5) and Spanish speakers (20.7 versus 17.3; Δ = 3.4; 95% CI: 3.0-3.8). There was no difference in improvement of scores between English and Spanish speakers (Δ = -0.24; 95% CI: -0.79 to 0.31), and this video was equally efficacious for those with lower and higher health literacy skills.

Evaluation of a brief intervention to reduce the negative consequences of drug misuse among adult emergency department patients.

OBJECTIVES: Determine if a brief intervention (BI) reduces the negative consequences of drug use/misuse among adult emergency department (ED) patients, and identify patients more likely to benefit from the BI. METHODS: This randomized, controlled trial enrolled 1026 18-64 year-old ED patients whose drug misuse indicated a needed for a BI. Differences in total Inventory of Drug Use Consequences (InDUC) scores between the treatment (BI) and control arms (no BI) were assessed every 90 days over a one-year period. Regression models were constructed to identify demographic and clinical factors associated with greater reductions in total InDUC scores. RESULTS: Although total InDUC scores decreased for both the treatment and control arms, there were no differences in scores between the treatment and the control arms at baseline at each follow-up. In the regression analyses, participants who were not using drugs or received drug treatment in the past 90 days generally had lower InDUC scores at each follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Although negative consequences decreased in both study arms over time, receiving a BI did not lead to a greater reduction in the negative consequences of drug misuse than not receiving a BI. Of importance in the design of future ED drug misuse interventions, participants who were successful in stopping their drug misuse or receiving drug treatment did show fewer negative consequences of drug use/misuse.

VARIATIONS IN RECRUITMENT YIELD, COSTS, SPEED AND PARTICIPANT DIVERSITY ACROSS INTERNET PLATFORMS IN A GLOBAL STUDY EXAMINING THE EFFICACY OF AN HIV/AIDS AND HIV TESTING ANIMATED AND LIVE-ACTION VIDEO AMONG ENGLISH- OR SPANISH-SPEAKING INTERNET OR SOCIAL MEDIA USERS.

For a world-wide, Internet-based study on HIV/AIDS and HIV testing knowledge, we compared the yields, speed and costs of recruitment and participant diversity across free postings on 13 Internet or social media platforms, paid advertising or postings on 3 platforms, and separate free postings and paid advertisements on Facebook. Platforms were compared by study completions (yield), time to completion, completion to enrollment ratios (CERs), and costs/ completion; and by participants' demographic characteristics, HIV testing history, and health literacy levels. Of the 482 English-speaking participants, Amazon Mechanical Turk yielded the most participants, recruited participants at the fastest rate and had the highest CER (0.78) and lowest costs / completion. Of the 335 Spanish-speaking participants, Facebook yielded the most participants and recruited participants at the fastest rate, although Amazon Mechanical Turk had the highest CER (0.72) and lowest costs/completion. Across platforms participants differed substantially according to their demographic characteristics, HIV testing history and health literay skills. The study results highlight the need for researchers to strongly consider choice of Internet or social media plaforms when conducting Internet-based research. Because of the sample specifications and cost restraints of studies, specific Internet/ social media or participant selection plaforms will be much more effective or appropriate than others.

Low-dose ketamine improves pain relief in patients receiving intravenous opioids for acute pain in the emergency department: results of a randomized, double-blind, clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: Low-dose ketamine has been used perioperatively for pain control and may be a useful adjunct to intravenous (IV) opioids in the control of acute pain in the emergency department (ED). The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of low-dose ketamine as an adjunct to morphine versus standard care with morphine alone for the treatment of acute moderate to severe pain among ED patients. METHODS: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial with three study groups was conducted at a large, urban academic ED over a 10-month period. Eligible patients were 18 to 65 years old with acute moderate to severe pain (score of at least 5 out of 10 on the numerical pain rating scale [NRS] and pain duration < 7 days) who were deemed by their treating physician to require IV opioids. The three study groups were: 1) morphine and normal saline placebo (standard care group), 2) morphine and 0.15 mg/kg ketamine (group 1), or 3) morphine and 0.3 mg/kg ketamine (group 2). Participants were assessed at 30, 60, and 120 minutes after study medication administration and received rescue analgesia as needed to target a 50% reduction in pain. The primary outcome measure of pain relief, or pain intensity reduction, was derived using the NRS and calculated as the summed pain-intensity (SPID) difference over 2 hours. The amount and timing of rescue opioid analgesia was evaluated as a secondary outcome. The occurrence of adverse events was also measured. RESULTS: Sixty patients were enrolled (n = 20 in each group). There were no differences between study groups with respect to age, sex, race/ethnicity, preenrollment analgesia, or baseline NRS. Over the 2-hour poststudy medication administration period, the SPIDs were higher (greater pain relief) for the ketamine study groups than the control group (standard care 4.0, interquartile range [IQR] = 1.8 to 6.5; group 1 7.0, IQR = 4.3 to 10.8; and group 2 7.8, IQR = 4.8 to 12.8; p < 0.02). The SPIDs for the ketamine groups were similar (p < 0.46). When compared to standard care, group 2 sustained the reduction in pain intensity up to 2 hours, whereas group 1 was similar to standard care by 2 hours. Similar numbers of patients received rescue analgesia: standard care group, seven of 20, 35%; group 1, four of 20, 20%; and group 2, four of 20, 20% (p = 0.48). Among those receiving rescue analgesia, those in the standard care group received analgesia sooner than either low-dose ketamine group, on average. More participants in the low-dose ketamine groups reported dysphoria and dizziness. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose ketamine is a viable analgesic adjunct to morphine for the treatment of moderate to severe acute pain. Dosing of 0.3 mg/kg is possibly more effective than 0.15 mg/kg, but may be associated with minor adverse events. Future studies should evaluate additional outcomes, optimum dosing, and use in specific populations.